This question is for the Premier. During the Integrity Commissioner’s investigation into the greenbelt grab, the Premier’s chief of staff, Patrick Sackville, said under oath that he did not discuss removal criteria with anyone until October 27, 2022. But late last year, we in the NDP obtained an email sent from the personal account of Ryan Amato to the personal account of Mr. Sackville, discussing the removals and dated October 17, 10 days earlier.

To the Premier: Can the Premier explain this 10-day discrepancy in the testimony of his chief of staff to the Integrity Commissioner?

This email was sent on the same day as a dramatic meeting between ministry staffers and the Premier’s housing policy adviser, Jae Truesdell. You might recall that was called a “train wreck of a meeting.” Mr. Truesdell was learning about the greenbelt scheme for the first time and, evidently, what he heard alarmed him. Mr. Amato said Mr. Truesdell didn’t know about the greenbelt scheme because he was told to “leave him in the dark.” According to the Integrity Commissioner, Mr. Amato identified Mr. Sackville as the “decision-maker in the Premier’s office for this project.”

Back to the Premier: Why did the Premier’s chief of staff tell Mr. Amato to leave his own housing policy adviser in the dark?

So I want to go back to the Premier again: In addition to Mr. Sackville, how many other officials in the Premier’s office discussed the greenbelt scheme earlier than what they told the Integrity Commissioner?

This question is for the Premier as well. This government was warned by the Auditor General back in 2021 that an overreliance on international student tuition was going to put our post-secondary education sector in a very untenable financial position. There was a steady stream of warnings coming from colleges and universities, from the government’s own expert panel, from us in the opposition, about the serious financial risk they were facing because of a lack of funding. The Minister of Colleges and Universities has claimed she wasn’t even aware a cap on international students was coming. It defies belief.

Back to the Premier: Was the minister asleep at the wheel here, or did she look the other way while private career colleges massively exploited the International Student Program?

Interjections.

Good morning, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. Providing honest testimony under oath is a core principle of justice in this province. I hope that’s something we can all agree on. The Premier told the Integrity Commissioner that he was “not immediately familiar” with greenbelt speculator Sergio Manchia because, apparently, he meets thousands of people, he said. Yet senior political staff were texting each other that the Premier “needs to stop calling this guy.” My question to the Premier is, what is the nature of his relationship with Sergio Manchia?

My question is to the Premier again. Can the Premier confirm he met with Mr. Manchia in 2021 to discuss site-specific greenbelt removals?

To the Premier: Does the Premier remember Mr. Manchia now? Did he provide assurances he would remove greenbelt lands at a private fundraiser for the Conservative Party?

Interjections.

Back to the Premier: I’m not the only one who is going to be questioning the discrepancy between the Premier’s testimony and the growing mountain of evidence. I would bet that the RCMP’s special prosecutor, who is investigating the alleged criminal corruption by this government, is going to be interested too.

So I would ask the Premier, would the Premier like to take the opportunity to correct the record?

The Premier also testified that he had no conversations—no conversations—about the Gormley GO station area prior to November 4, 2022. But minutes from a meeting on October 13, three weeks earlier, say, “Gormley—decision on areas is with the Premier’s office right now” and goes on to say, by the way, the “Premier doesn’t understand [the lands are] in the Oak Ridges moraine.”

Back to the Premier: Could he clarify his testimony?

The Premier testified he was not involved in any way with site selection before November 2, 2022. He repeated the same claims to the media just yesterday. But now we know he was discussing a site-specific removal with Mr. Manchia a year earlier, and we just keep finding more evidence: meeting notes that say the Premier’s Office wants this done, that the Premier’s Office asked for a picture to make sure it’s captured.

To the Premier: Does he still expect people to believe that he wasn’t involved from the start?

Interjections.